-
- The Eiffel Tower seen from the Champ-de-Mars
Photo: Didier Rykner - See the image in its page
While Emmanuel Grégoire, the first deputy mayor of Paris, said that he was not opposed to the classification of the Eiffel Tower and was prepared to look into the matter, Anne Hidalgo stated this morning on TF1 that she was opposed. So let’s take a moment to look at the issue of the classification of a historic monument, to see what the owner of the monument - in this case the City of Paris - and the authority responsible for protecting historic monuments - the Ministry of Culture - can do.
But first, let’s look at the meaning of classification. Article L. 621-1 of the French Heritage Code explains that "Buildings whose conservation is of public interest from the point of view of history or art are classified as historic monuments in whole or in part by the administrative authority".
Does the conservation of the Eiffel Tower present "a public interest from the point of view of history or art"? To ask the question is to answer it. However, we could also ask what is meant by "a public interest". To this, the Ministry of Culture - but also case law - puts forward the "notions of rarity, exemplarity, authenticity and integrity of the property are taken into account".
Is the Eiffel Tower rare architecture? Of course it is.
Is the Eiffel Tower exemplary architecture? Of course it is.
Is the Eiffel Tower authentic architecture? Of course it is.
Does the Eiffel Tower have architectural integrity? Of course it does (even if, for example, the removal of its original spiral staircase, which is regularly auctioned off in bits and pieces, has damaged its integrity).
Along with Notre-Dame, Versailles and Mont Saint-Michel, the Eiffel Tower is undoubtedly one of the best-known monuments in the world. No sane person would argue that it should not be classified as a historic monument.
If André Malraux, who had the Eiffel Tower listed, did not classified it as a historic monument, as Anne Hidalgo claims, using this in her lack of culture as an argument that she must think is unassailable, there may be several reasons for this:
– the first is that registration is often a preliminary stage to classification (even if it is possible to classify directly),
– the second is that - a priori - the agreement of the owner, the City of Paris, is required, which obviously has never been forthcoming,
– the third is that in 1964, when André Malraux was Minister of Culture, nineteenth-century architecture was still very much underestimated; remember that it was this same Malraux who authorised the installation of Marc Chagall’s ceiling to cover the one by Lenepveu that Garnier had wanted, and that it was this same Malraux who had Jean-Paul Laurens’ ceiling removed from the Odéon theatre to replace it with one by André Masson. Finally, even though Malraux had just left the Ministry of Culture, the demolition of Les Halles de Baltard was able to go ahead because he had neither listed nor classified the pavilions. Bringing André Malraux into this debate is a very poor argument.
The Eiffel Tower must therefore be classified as a historic monument. Apart from the Paris City Council, no one can really claim that this is unnecessary, especially as it will obviously strengthen its protection, which is far from optimal today, contrary to what Emmanuel Grégoire claims (see article).
And to achieve this, the Ministry of Culture holds all the cards. The French Heritage Code provides for the possibility of automatic classification, in the absence of the owner’s agreement. The procedure is as follows: the Minister requests the (advisory) opinion of the Commission nationale du patrimoine et de l’architecture (who would think that the latter would give a negative opinion in the case of the Eiffel Tower?), then the automatic classification is pronounced by decree of the Conseil d’État.
It should be noted that compensation may be claimed by the owner in the event of compulsory classification, "if the easements and obligations in question result in a change to the state or use of the site that causes direct, material and certain harm", which would obviously not be the case here.
There is therefore nothing to prevent the Eiffel Tower from being classified as a historic monument, despite the Mayor of Paris’ obviously purely political decision to refuse this measure, simply because it is being proposed by her main competitor.